Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Republicans, Stop Calling Obama Elitist
Because the real reason you don't like him is that he's smarter than you.
New Rule: Republicans need to stop saying Barack Obama is an elitist, or looks down on rural people, and just admit you don't like him because of something he can't help, something that's a result of the way he was born. Admit it, you're not voting for him because he's smarter than you.
In her acceptance speech, Gov. Sarah Palin accused Obama of using his run for the White House as a "journey of personal discovery" -- this from the lady who just spent 10 minutes of her speech introducing her family -- Track, Trig, Bristol, Piper -- for a minute there I thought she was calling in an airstrike.
Karl Rove described Obama as "the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini, and making snide comments about everyone who passes by." Unlike George Bush, who's the guy at the country club who makes snide comments, and then passes out. Now this characterization, of course, was something Mr. Rove just completely pulled out of his bulbous, gelatinous ass, but remember this is America, a land where people believe anything they hear. One of McCain's ads casts Obama as "the one," implying he thinks he's the Messiah. Good, maybe he can raise McCain from the dead.
It doesn't matter to Karl Rove that his country club characterization is fictitious, it's the role that Obama must play if the party of plutocrats is going to win over the little guy. Over and over at this convention we heard about the new put-upon victim in our society, the person in America, like Sarah Palin, who's constantly mocked because they're from a ... small town! Governor Yup Yup's got 'em all riled up about being disrespected.
Barack Obama can't help it if he's a magna cum laude Harvard grad and you're a Wal-Mart shopper who resurfaces driveways with your brother-in-law. Americans are so narcissistic that our candidates have to be just like us. That's why George Bush is president. And that's where the McCain camp gets its campaign strategy: Paint Obama as cocky and arrogant and wait for America to vote him off, like the black guy in every reality show. A black president? Half of Pennsylvania isn't ready for black quarterbacks. Forget Obama, they think Will Smith needs to be taken down a peg.
And finally: As for "country first," you know who's putting country first? I am, by supporting Obama, because a victory this fall for the McCain-Mooseburger ticket would make my job in the next four years very, very easy.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
114 Comments so far
Show AllRight he is an independent mimicking his one size fits all agenda. HAve you every heard this elitist tur_ negatively critique the Democrats?
always
It would be great if we could cast a negative vote and actually take one away from a candidate. On second thought - touch screens may already be doing that.
Vote independent if you can - Mass. - Vt. - N.Y. ect. Vote your conscience if you must.
80% of Americans believe our country is going in the wrong direction.
Both candidates have surrounded themselves with advisers that created the 80%
Boy, what a efffing moron is Maher: "Barack Obama can't help it if he's a magna cum laude Harvard grad and you're a Wal-Mart shopper who resurfaces driveways with your brother-in-law."
The trouble here is that the hard-hats who resurface driveways cannot help it EITHER, they probably never had the opportunities Obama had. Rubbing their noses in it is a REAL smart way to get them to vote for you...
Oh, I thought it was the republicans who were making that "big mistake".
Your point has some validity, as a tool of PSYOPS propaganda against Dems, from the righteous wing nuts
Namaste
All the breaks, that Obama guy, a teenage Mom, an absent father, mixed race, poor background, yup all the breaks! I think you need a name change ......
Maher's humor may not be funny to some, but he does note that political decisions are made, not with intellect, but in response to propaganda and appeals to gut level reactions.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Conservatives/Liberals the terms are outmoded. Governors are less interested in the governed than they are about Re-election. Would *"Native Criminal Class", be a better Descriptor? *Gore Vidal
Thanks Bill for your continuing "Rub",
I'm richer for the discussion and I want you to keep heckling us poor "joes", until we get mad enough to do something about it.
You are a blessing to read and if the citizens that want to frame your discourse in their own terms are barking at you then I'm very well pleased at your wit and your verbosity.
hman
Vidal also noted that ,"what we have in America is welfare for the rich and capitalism for the poor"......
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Vidal is also a supporter of Obama.
“I liked the idea of him, but he never managed to get my interest. I was brought around by his overall intelligence – specifically when he did his speech on race and religion.” Gore Vidal
McCain's wife is worth $200,000,000.00
Isn't that elitist? Gulfstreams et al?
Thanks for the laughs Bill. I'm a mixed race American who was raised in Alaska. Obama is a blessing, because us mixed race folk have always had to 'speak properly, dress appropriately, and don't sound too black.' At least he is able to see what is reflected by the white society and throw it back in their face (and half his).
He is not elitest. He is doing what he needs to do to deal with all this political bullsh*t that keeps drowning our country every election. The only thing the Republicans know how to do is create conflict where there is none.
As far as Ms. Palin goes, she's a travesty to the women in Alaska. We are hardworking, survivalists; she steals, lies and is the spokesperson for all the corruption in Alaska due to the oil companies. And probably some other companies thrown in just for kicks. Btw, Wasilla is the crystal meth capital of Alaska. That should clue you in on something.
Law Student
As long as the corporate media connives with the Repugs to, paraphrasing George Lakoff, frame the debate with control of the words, the Democrats and everyone else will always be at a disadvantage. The latest incarnation of this is the party of the WASP corporate elite smearing their main opponent, Obama (a self-made man from a disadvantaged background who got ahead because he was smart and worked hard), with a tag that would not be out of place should he apply that to them. That this is being done by the proxies in service to the true elite of America, corporate big wigs, is pathetically ironic. The Repugs have also managed to tap into America's cultural hostility / jealousy to intelligence (Mike Judge's movie "Idiocracy" nailed it as well), where elitist is one of the more polite catchwords. This attack strategy is predicated on the belief that enough of the electorate are intellectually lazy and not willing to do their homework, which would reveal the Repugs lies in less time than it takes to go through a fast food drive-through.
"Probitas laudatur et alget" Juvenal
Watch out,
they may decide to put the voting machines in
___ "Jack 'n VOTING Box" ___ drive throughs
Namaste
well attack obama all you want
he switched his stances on almost all of the major points since he beat clinton.
good thing i voted green.
Michael Moore was on Larry King last week. Larry asked him about Obama and his pretty middle of the road position on health care reform, and Michael Moore responded that the John Conyers bill, HR-676, which calls for single payer, Medicare for all, is a "pretty good bill" and that if the Democratically controlled Congress were to pass HR-676, which has 90 cosponsors, President Obama would almost surely sign it.
So if we can get a filibuster proof Senate, Obama is likely to be moved to the left by a progressive congress and an attentive public.
The same cannot be said of McCain. If he gets in there we will be screwed, and there is no doubt about that.
Nader should be included, along with Barr and McKinney in all the debates. But that does not mean that I think Nader would win the debates. Obama is a brilliant man and great candidate. I think he would probably win the wider debate too.
But to pretend that McCain is a serious candidate and to limit the debate to just he and Obama turns the election into a farce.
And Moore knows this--how?? Stop projecting what you wish Obama to be onto Obama. He is what he is. He is a moderate. Fine. The question is, will the Am. people stop intellectualizing long enough to actualy do something
[_________R E A L I T Y _ I S _ O N L Y _ O N E __________]
[________ O F _ T H E _ M A N Y _ P O S S I B L E ________]
[__________ I _ L _ L _ U _ S _ I _ O _ N _ S ______________]
George Wanker Bush is not an illusion and neither are McCain/Palin. They are Violent Death, usually at an early age and for no reason at all. They make reality appear so absurd there's no way you can think it's an illusion, even if it really is.
Reality is the illusion we haven't seen through yet.
not sure who said it:)
Their apparent "adamant power" is granted ONLY AS spuriously as Federal Reserve Notes are "valuable".
All it takes is a slight push, of a few million of us, in the same direction, for a few seconds -- and watch the miracles before our eyes appear ( while simultaneously, the scales fall from our eyes ).
¿ Talk about mass illusions, look at all the people just waiting for the trickle down to start ?
We've the inalienable and soverign power to turn this around, and start the reverse :
[________ P _ ! _ $ _ $ ___ O N ___ T _ H _ E _ M ________]
Namaste
We don't trust them uppity, elitist people that read them books, and especially those that read'm at them "special" east coast snob schools. We don't trust them people that give thoughtful answers, as a matter of fact, we don't trust thought. The BIBLE does the thinking.
That we think that bible college is OK is proof that we ain't again no educatin.
Good yuks. Republican propaganda is thin stuff, but people seem to fall for it anyway. We're stoopid peepul.
However, Maher may have less of a point here. Obama's hiring of "experts" from the Chicago School of Economics, a criminal gang of savage free marketeers, is the very pinnacle of elitism.
Ironically, one of Obama's economic advisors is an apologist for Wal-Mart's low wages. He thinks that's good stuff.
Even though Wal-Mart's owners are among the top richest Americans, they make their workers apply for Medicaid rather that pay for an affordable health insurance plan for their employees. And it's Wal-Mart's employees who made the Waltons rich in the first place.
I guess that's classism, rather than elitism - but that's kind of splitting hairs.
The Republican "elitism" propaganda charge works to some degree because it is partially true. The definition of propaganda is that you present a half truth. Obama's campaign is funded by wealthy corporations like investment company Goldman Sachs. There is nothing that's truly populist about Obama.
That said, the Republican Party is the plutocrat party. They are the ultimate elites - rich people who have pulled up the ladder with them.
Stoopid Amerikans think Republicans are against "big government," even when they've proved themselves to be the biggest deficit spenders of all time. Lots of Americans just can't see through the contradiction, it seems.
-TIA
Conservatives/Liberals the terms are outmoded. Governors are less interested in the governed than they are about Re-election. Would *"Native Criminal Class", be a better Descriptor? *Gore Vidal
Bingo for injecting the word "Classism" yet again into a discourse about politics.
The term is so overused that we don't even flinch when someone uses it in speech.
I'm a little sensitive to that word and I can't help it, sorry.
I've been reading through as much political history as I can stand to take in.
I've recently read through some biographies of the founding father's (George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton and Goveurnor Morris as well as The Federalist Papers and even Gore Vidal's fictional extrapolation of Aaron Burr).
The term should raise everyone's hackles because of it's connections to the "Classical", world that these gentlemen lived in and their sensitivity to it.
The thought that men of means from the classical world should determine who our government should be created to serve, as opposed to Mr. Jefferson's idea that each person should have and practice that right.
We use the term now to describe a similar argument that men of means are "better", equipped to shape our future than other less fortunate citizens.
I believe the word "Elitist", fits that description more correctly (certainly the Wiktionary definition lists "belief in rule by an Elite Group" in this way.
That would better frame the discussion about who is or isn't an Elitist.
hman
"Elitist"? This can't be a serious question in THAT country, can it??? Contrary to my backwater homeland, you've got to be a millionaire - AT LEAST! Billionaire is much better! - to become a nationally important politician in America! So being a) a millionaire and being b)elitist are somehow supposed to be mutually exclusive??? I thought that a) necessarily triggered b)!
My tiny European brain can't absorb the absurdity of this public argument!
I know that it might sound like a fairy tale to you, but where I live, politicians typically AREN'T millionaires. Forget billionaires. They aren't even lawyers, as a rule!!
"Elitist" in America stands for people who are using their brain.
In other words: The American disenfranchised underclass, the ones one is trying to lure with these slogans, is obviously vast. HUGE. One wouldn't play that theme every four years if one didn't know how enormous the uneducated underclass is. The majority, actually. So vast that all of these claims about what an incredibly wealthy place America is, are of course an illusion. There are very many rich people there, but there are far more poor people in America than statistics tell us. American party strategies definitely show me that they know very well how many disadvantaged people there are in America. How poor and deprived major parts of America really are.
It doesn't do any good when a country stubbornly refuses to face its sordid facts:
Only the abysmal lack of education and information of the majority of Americans prevents them from getting fed up and angry. Just show them tons of outrageous footage about Darfur, or "Survivor", if they don't watch any news, and they still believe that they have a good deal. They are after all oblivious of the outside world. Just don't show them any footage about Western Europe or Japan on popular shows or on the news. As long as they have no clue, they will remain compliant.
Like the North Koreans, to quote the only parallel I can think of..
Because: If they knew, they might revolt.
In the meantime, to keep preventing the system from collapsing, the American rich are supposed to pretend that they are at heart like the poor and have to make people believe that they understand the poor so the poor will always vote for the rich who will in turn perpetuate the reign of the rich in America.
As in: "You have to be rich in order to become a powerful politician but once you have arrived, you have to pretend that you are thinking and living like the poor in order to make the poor vote for you."
A system can't get any more hypocritical and disgusting than America's is right now. This is the apex of cynicism and at the same time a willful exploitation of the lousy state of education and information of the majority of its population. No, I am not exaggerating. If you happen to disagree, you are just kidding yourself or haven't travelled your country for a long while.
The American system, for all its 1776 folklore, is today extremely elitist, much more than the present European system is! If people's forefathers had held out long enough, like for a hundred years, since most left Europe in the latter part of the 19th century, they might have ended up in a much more egalitarian society than what Americans today ended up with. America is ruled by the rich and is only there to cater for the rich, and there isn't even the pretense that this isn't so - exactly the way Europe used to be when most American's forefathers/mothers emigrated!
It's not like Europe isn't ruled by the rich indirectly, any capitalist society eventually is. But in Europe, at least they are not members of an administration. They still have to try to influence governments and parliaments somehow and indirectly, which doesn't always work their way. And millionaires as politicians are as a rule suspect. (Except in Italy...)
One doesn't measure politicians' popularity by counting the donations they are receiving. As a rule, election campaigns are mostly financed out of the country's public budget. EXACTLY in order to avoid the impression that one can "buy" elections if only one has the necessary financial clout. And there is a limit as to the air time one can buy. This is true for most places in Europe, by the way.
It all looks like France before the French Revolution 1789. Except that French aristocrats pre-1789 didn't have to pretend that they didn't know what a good life looks like. American politicians OTOH, mostly per definition rich guys, have to pretend that they all are basically hamburger-devouring good ole boys who live in a simple cabin in the woods, with a single light-bulb dangling over their heads while they are praying to Jesus for guidance several times a day. Or dedicated hockey moms. While they all are actually devoured by the urge to have power.
If I were a cynical politician, I couldn't wish for a more obliging and gullible public audience than Americans.
Thanks for the outside perspective. And yes, mostly right on.
I'll bet the country you are from has a very strict ruling class. There is zero chance a mixed race person like Obama could be the leader of France, Sweden, Denmark, Germany.
In the U.S. there's at least that chance now.
Conservatives have been kept in power in this country by the middle class/wealthy suburbs full of people who have college degrees, not the uneducated "underclass". To imply that Americans are kept uneducated like North Koreans so the wealthy elite can rule us is arrogant European left wing nonsense.
I watched his show last night. It took a while, but I've finally had my fill of the guy.
"Barack Obama can't help it if he's a magna cum laude Harvard grad and you're a Wal-Mart shopper who resurfaces driveways with your brother-in-law. Americans are so narcissistic that our candidates have to be just like us. That's why George Bush is president. And that's where the McCain camp gets its campaign strategy."
Holy class contempt Batman! Way to rub worker's noses in shit.
The people who shop Wal-Mart do so because sadly it's often the only place they can afford to go.
Is there something wrong with doing blue-collar work?
George Bush an everyman?
No, George Bush is president because of election fraud and because he was selected by a Supreme Court full of his cronies. Stop beating down on the victims.
It amazes me when people on the left, the side that supposedly cares about working and poor people and wants to better our lot, displays so much disdain for those same people. In fact, it infuriates me to no end. Not only because I am one of those people, but because it's sabotage.
Oh yeah, Bill's an Islamophobe too. Anyone ever see the "Muslim beauty pageant" skit he did on his show once? He had a bunch of staffers walk around almost completely covered in black cloth and then proceeded to basically run down the Arab world in a way that would make Rush Limbaugh chuckle.
He's also disturbingly Zionistic, justifying and making excuses for Israel's atrocities as well as attacking every organized religion but Judaism, which he puts on a pedestal.
I also find him at least somewhat sexist. He's constantly complaining about women, often implying that women are too emotional, shallow, and thusly aren't cut out for positions of power and brags about being a womanizer. God, look at the women he dates.
Dan Savage was on also, another faux liberal. Except he's so militantly gay, he wants to seemingly disenfranchise any group he suspects harbors homophobia. His column is a demeaning, irresponsible, lightning-rod-for-gay-bashing joke, and he's not above censoring people who are a little too left-wing for his tastes. Ask Saab Lofton. The man's got an intellect and a conscience at least 2 times bigger than Maher and Savage combined.
I do think Obama's an elitist. I didn't used to feel that way, but it's becoming more and more apparent to me that he relates to wealthy white folks more than anyone, just like McCain. Except Obama's rich white friends like gay people. They have no stake in positive social change. Their lives will not change whether our next regime is Democrat or Republican.
Kick around the "little guy" all you want Bill. It's HIS life that is at stake, not yours. You'll still be making money hand over fist by running off your mouth while the little guy will be trying to figure out how to pay his bills and feed his family.
Asshole.
People also need to stop making out Bush to be a foppish simpleton. If that were the case, I truly doubt that this 8 year crime wave would have been as maliciously successful as it has been.
How do you define "elitist"??
"People also need to stop making out Bush to be a foppish simpleton. If that were the case, I truly doubt that this 8 year crime wave would have been as maliciously successful as it has been."
Ummm, that would actually be attributed to the other cronies, Rove and Cheney...
Yeah, but Dubbya's at the helm. I think his stupidity is just an act.
"But it is probably not enough to get blue collar people to run out and vote for you if you keep insulting them. Bil Maher used to be funny. But he sure knows his audience! When he's n LA-he gives a whole different schtick than he did on CNN other night. He didnt " write " this--it is from his talk show last night. i saw it and moaned.Because it serves to alienate the classes/states that Obama is failing in now.Do you want to win, or just make a historical statement? You could do both , you know. If you didnt pick the easiest targets around.African Am. versus poor whites--the oldest trick in he book. And al thesesuper smart, super educated peope keep falling for it. Hahahaha.Will yo do that when McCain wins? Go ahead. Blame it on poor people. Don takeon the real adversary--that to scary, eh? McCain thought it was hilarious, I bet. Keep it up."
Thanks for that. I totally agree KDelphi.
"Yeah, but Dubbya's at the helm. I think his stupidity is just an act."
Oh right! Acting stupid is the ideal way to portray the position of most powerful leader in the world. A great way not to be held accountable. "Uh, duh.. " the best way to demonstrate competence and make others feel safe and secure in their blessings.
I guess it really is just too complicated to figure out.
I actually think Maher was not belittling "the driveway pavers", but belittling the idea that their choice for president should also be one, rather than a man with some more education and more relevant experience. Admittedly, the delivery was poor.
I still believe Bush is a simpleton (not foppish so much as hillbillyish) in way over his head, and Cheney pulls all the strings. Witness the scene in Woodward's book, with the Cheney war machine pushing for a second round of tax cuts for the filthy rich, and W in the corner asking "Didn't we already give them their cuts?"
Bill's job is going to be easy no matter who wins.
Side topic: I haven't been to the movies in years, but I am going to see Religulous.
Apologies in advance for "spamming" the comments sites with this message, but I'm trying to maximize exposure of this note to the CD community and get everyone to DO SOMETHING besides gripe on this website.
If the Obama campaign won't go negative on Palin, we must encourage the MSM to do so. They are showing all signs of backing off since the McCain campaign whined about the "unfair treatment."
Here’s a copy of the nasty note I sent to CNN and MSNBC, plus the Washington Post, to try to motivate them to do their job for once. Here’s the links to contact CNN and MSNBC, if you want to plagiarize my note and send them an equally angry message. I encourage everyone at CD to not only complain to these media outlets about their failure to expose Palin for what she is , but their local newspapers as well. These media outlets are hearing from the right - if we on the left are not willing to try to have our voices heard then we deserve another eight years of GOP rule.
If you don't like my note - then come up with your own - but quit your complaining here at CD and start letting the media outlets have it. Do something! And tell all your friends to write to these outlets as well...
http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form1.html?35
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10285339/
"CNN has performed its duty to the public in the past by providing reports on John McCain's involvement in the Keating Five affair, as well as details on Senator Obama's relationship to Reverend Wright, his views on patriotism, and whether or not his "Bittergate" comments reflect an attitude of elitism. I therefore look forward to CNN thoroughly reporting on the following issues that have already arisen regarding Sarah Palin. What does she have to say about the following? And why won't the Republican party allow her to be approached and questioned?
1. She is being investigated in Alaska by a Republican legislature for improperly terminating the employment of a public safety official who refused to fire or accelerate the investigation of her ex-brother in law.
2. As mayor of Wasilla, she apparently tried to fire a librarian in her home town for refusing to ban "bad books."
3. She claims she opposed the "Bridge to Nowhere" when she apparently actually supported it during her campaign for governor. She only came out "against" it when it became clear it was going to be killed anyway.
4. She is claiming she is against corruption and "politics as usual" when she apparently actually hired consultants to help her bring federal dollars into Alaska.
5. She cites as an accomplishment the sale of the governor's jet on ebay. Senator McCain has stated that she personally sold it "at a profit." The plane was actually sold months after the attempted internet sale, for a loss of some half million dollars.
6. She apparently wants to teach creationism in the public schools.
7. She apparently not only doesn't believe global warming is being caused by man, she doesn't even acknowledge that it is occurring.
8. The minister at her Assembly of God church has made numerous controversial political statements. How much of his world-view does she share? Obama ultimately disavowed most of what Reverend Wright had to say. Will Palin be willing to do the same regarding her minister, or will she embrace his positions?
Failure to subject Governor Palin to the same level of scrutiny as other candidates, i.e., providing her with special treatment, constitutes sexism of the worst kind. CNN must not back off just because the GOP is trying to argue that she is being treated unfairly. An ABC poll shows that while some 50% of the county view her favorably , almost 40% do not. (These numbers do not make her "popular" BTW.) Suggest you do your job and keep the 40% provided with the information they seek. It's a sorry state of affairs that we have to rely on the international press, Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, and of all things, the National Enquirer, to conduct proper investigative journalism.
Obama and Biden have to tie all that to McSame's PISS POOR judgement skills. The media is rightwing so getting them to do their job is pretty much off the table. If Obama can't fight like a bulldog the way Republicans do, he won't be trusted to stop the "conservative" legislation when he's in office. But then again, like the rest of the party, his voting record and getting on Bill O'LIEly's show to surrender on the issue of Iraq to the rightwing GOP yet again already shows that he cannot be trusted just like McSame's flip-flopping and economic scandals proving that he's no reformer either.
Conservatives/Liberals the terms are outmoded. Governors are less interested in the governed than they are about Re-election. Would *"Native Criminal Class", be a better Descriptor? *Gore Vidal
Guy the Gorilla September 6th, 2008 8:05 pm
If the Obama campaign won't go negative on Palin, we must encourage the MSM to do so.
They are showing all signs of backing off since the McCain campaign whined about the "unfair treatment."
Well Guy... okay I'll send these messages to the publications that you have written to.
Seems like a good idea.
I don't think that the publications will do anything more than they have already done.
I do agree with your effort and I will contribute a series of letters to reinforce the same points that you have made.
I will post here again after I have sent them off and will update you if anyone working there actually reads them and replies.
hman
cosmobilly September 6th, 2008 8:31 pm
Bush had help...
.
.
Nader can win....... The voters will decide.
Nader will change things.
Nader is our only hope.
Nader is the only choice.
Fight the Two-party system.
VOTE NADER 2008… You’ll be glad you did and so will I…
http://www.votenader.org/index.html
.
I am ralphie Nader and I approve this message.
" a working class hero is something to be..." John Lennon
Bill Maher is closer to a Libertarian than a Democrat or an Republican. He just wants to do his show and smoke out in peace...
Please continue! "...keep 'em, doped on religion and sex and tv..nd you think you're so clever adn classless and free...but you're still fucking peasants , as far as I can see...".
Look at any critisism that the GOP make closely, and you will see they are describing themselves.
Who is more elite than the Megacorp CEO's that back them, none are more sexist that the group that chose a female VP simply to try to attract stray Hillary supporters, no one is more unpatriotic than those who old corporate loyalty higher than national loyalty, no one spends more money that the warmongers, and no one is less moral than the hypocritical psuedo-christians.
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
Look, if you go to almost every institution of higher learning in this country you will find that the vast majority of students avoid subjects requiring critical thinking. Most college students do poorly in math and philosophy classes involving logic. Very few take more than the required class or two. And top that off with the fact that only about 1 in 5 adults in this country even has a bachelors degree or better.
The point, as the vast majority that post on this forum clearly demonstrate, is how too few are capable of genuine deconstructive analysis. Like assholes, everyone has opinions, but sadly most of those serve only to demonstrate why the political dialogue can be so hypocritical, so shallow and so irrelevant yet still so influential over all the sheeple.
Go ahead and follow your heart, let your emotions be your guide and you will be swallowed whole by the beast. Your heart can be a good thing, in a fair and just world, but this is not a fair and just world. If your passions and convictions are not tempered with the necessary wisdom they can and will be turned on you and diminished to ineffective foolhardiness. Bush, et al have made that abundantly clear. This forum is making that clear.
Such is the case to believe any presidential candidate, especially Nader, is going to effectively change anything. That is just plain idiotic, and clearly demonstrates a humungous ignorance for how power is actually wielded. Even W achieved nothing by himself. We the people have been swept along by a myriad of forces that have been composed over decades, by influences that are centuries old.
And for goodness sake, what to do with all the pseudo-intellectuals here, believing they have espoused some insight or meaningful counterpoint to who knows what next or for what purpose?
As this article points out hypocrisy, it should be very clear and evident how republicans calling Obama an elitist is the kettle calling the pot black. Anyone who doesn't know by now that the Repugs are the elitist party should just ask Limbaugh or O'Reilly - they are after all blessed with God's gift of insight into all that ails us. The republicans calling Obama elitist is classic deflection, and it is astonishingly incredulous the number of you that give the tactic credibility, particularly those that then actually begin to believe it's true.
The new world order is at hand, and it has been made possible not by those who wield the power but by those who give it. The change that needs to happen is not about who holds the office, but by those who give the office its power. And unfortunately, that would be all of you.
The heart is always a better guide than the head.
That being said, most of those who oppose the ticket given to us by the imperial elites - the McCain/Obama ticket - have come to our conclusions through listening to those on the ticket - not through some knee jerk reaction.
That would be the case of the Obamaites who fail to understand that bringing change, or even a step towards change does not come through voting for this or that guy of the imperial establishment.
Change comes through building a social movement, and voting for a third party Nader/McKinney (take your pick) - is one of those building bricks.
Voting for Obama is to strike at the very foundation of that building, because it cripples social movements / anti-war movements to support a guy who supports war.
http://almusawwir.org/resistance/
pie in the sky - right idea but no chance of pulling it off
I've never been a supporter of the 2-party primary system, been registered as an independent my entire adult life so I understand where you're coming from. But you can't pull it off. Unless maybe you know what some of those other building blocks are, and how to put those together. Do you?
As for the heart 'always' being a better guide? That is romantic nonsense. Consciousness is what informs the mind and allows us to know what is in our heart. Consciousness is our connection with inner self and others. You heart may compel you to pursue this or that, but your mind must then be employed to make it so. Your heart will guide you off a cliff in despair or to impossible ends unless checked and tempered with wisdom. The heart without consciousness and wisdom is impetuous and often foolish. On the other hand, any pursuit without heart is empty and disingenuous.
Let's pray that we never deny our hearts but never lose ourselves foolishly.
OK - whatever you say - you obviously are intellectually superior to me, so sorry i opened my mouth.
p.s. when you vote for a war monger like Obama you are denying your heart, and have lost yourself foolishly, but then, that is just my heart talking - what do i know?
p.s. 2 - you might want to look into the word "mind" and "heart" a little closely, it is your head that is making you come up with all kinds of nonsensical rationalizations to vote for someone who will kill more children in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Palestine --- and more places... your heart would never allow you to do that. But then what do i know, you being intellectually superior obviously have a superior argument.
http://almusawwir.org/resistance/
So typical... so many assumptions.
So, evil cannot/does not exist in some hearts?
And on the matter of 'mind' science would appreciate it a great deal if you could define just what 'mind' is. If you looked into it yourself, you would know that 'mind' is as uncertain a concept as what you call 'heart,' and of which many scientists and mystics alike still seek to quantify in more certain terms. it may turn out that both are aspects of soul, but then just what is soul?
And mocking me, because I have indeed studied this both academically and as matter of personal discovery, hardly serves a positive end now, does it?
And by the way, if Obama wants to run amuck and wage a war all by himself, I personally would like to see that. Rather, it is the military, the Congress, the soldiers, the financiers and the greater will of the people who will determine when and how war is waged. You know, "what if they gave a war and nobody came?" Leastways, till the general population became so disenfranchised, and so many others gun-ho about phony patriotism.
How many people do you know that were all too ready to see Bush go after the bad guys, the 'axis of evil.' How easy was it for you or I to speak out against the "either you're with us or against us' crowd? That's not because Bush was such a war monger (he was) but because the majority of people thought he was right to do so. And even now, though the polls say most of us are against the war, not nearly enough are acting out against it to have any meaningful affect?
But, if you think Nader or any other third party president can become elected let alone single-handedly repel the tide, then you are proving my point about heart. On the other hand, if you can follow your heart and engage your mind to enjoin constructively with others in order to find ways to make REAL change happen than I truly welcome you to do so. I will help you.
My point, as always on this forum, is that if folks are serious about making a REAL change, then first you need to address the core issues. You need to learn and understand the issues that are core to where we have come from, how we got here and where we are going - otherwise it is just a bunch of wistful wishful and random noise meant for nobody.
And given the relatively few folks here that seem to truly get it, we have a while to go yet before it can happen. Especially given how easily and readily other folks seek to cut down or contend with the bright and informed folks who are perhaps actually capable of identifying solutions.
So THAT is why Obama comes off so cool, yetr half the time I dont believe him
Right. People give other people power over them because they are foolish enough to think that those (in politics) care about them (or their 'God', or other women's uteruses, and will make sure their SUV will always be full, or that their children will be 'safe'). Americans have an INABILITY to think about the community, nation, world as a whole, and how their lives affect that whole. They are TAUGHT not too. THIS is the problem. It isn't about the greater good for these politicians (Obama and McCain). Americans don't care about the greater good- If they did- capitalism and globalization would be obsolete. What we are doing isn't working. Some people know this (most don't and VOTE that way).... And yes, most of them have had the luxury of learning, in institutions of higher education.... How do we break this cycle of foolishness?.... I wonder.....
Right on!
How to break the cycle of foolishness?
In faith, to simply understand that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. That is, our nation is really only as fortunate as the least fortunate.
Practically, remove money from the political process and enable civilian oversight over all bureaucracy.
Socially, don't let emotional issues (especially fear) be used to divide and conquer us. Understand and revere the unalienable rights and Laws of Nature upon which American Independence is founded, and continue to defend this, the American Spirit, till death. "Give me liberty or give me death."
Intellectually, to better understand power and how it is wielded, used and abused, and augment not diminish the separation (checks and balances) of government.
Economically, make corporations socially responsible persons, and socialize money - money is after all the fruit of our labor.
Personally, take to heart the knowledge that we are as a nation and a globe all in this together, and seek what makes us alike, not different. Celebrate the differences and embrace the commonality - and every individuals right to the pursuit of happiness.